[Date Prev][Date
Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date
Index][Thread Index]
RE: Re: Small Claims
- To: <ukha_d@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: Re: Small Claims
- From: "Kenneth Watt" <kennwatt@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 13:38:20 -0000
- Delivered-to: mailing list ukha_d@xxxxxxx
- Mailing-list: list ukha_d@xxxxxxx; contact
ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
- Reply-to: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Hey, I'm as keen as anyone to get a bargain :-)
I just accept that there is two sides to every story and this thing
could go either way by the looks of it due to all the different,
conflicting, arguments and views of it. It will be interesting to see
how it all pans out.
Personally I think that the mail from Kodak stating that a contract had
been entered into is binding on them, but there seems to be much heated
debate on the subject.
K.
This is K. From Work! I really should be working ;-)
-----Original Message-----
From: musashi1977uk [mailto:musashi1977uk@xxxxxxx]
Sent: 10 January 2002 12:48
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subject: [ukha_d] Re: Small Claims
Well I hate to disagree with trading standards, but my solicitor
feels there is a claim for "loss of bargain" and I will be
persuing
my claim if they fail to deliver my goods.
<SNIP....I REMEMBERED!>
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index
|